What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Next TV rights deal part 2

Are you happy with the new TV deal?


  • Total voters
    74

Chief_Chujo

First Grade
Messages
8,131
Like doc said, its just a shit tactic so they can go "oh we really wanted Friday 6pm, but I guess we can take Sunday 6:30. For less money of course". Problem is it's not believable, Friday 6pm would be a ratings disaster.
 

Desert Qlder

First Grade
Messages
9,387
We are witnessing a massive face saving exercise. News Limited are the masters of manipulating the message, particular when it is designed to be favourable to themselves.

This latest output is just the start of it. Congratulating Gyngell and not Smith for the Nine deal is the biggest giveaway to their shift in approach. They simply do not want to afford any compliments to Smith or Grant on what they achieved for the game at their expense. The next step is to make it appear that the final outcome is something that News has forced the NRL in to. See the next round of fevered articles from Davidson, Rothfield et al through that prism I would say.

At present, I'd speculate that the NRL negotiating team are getting on with the business. Whether that is furious negotiations or keeping their powder dry until next year I do not know. But they are marching to the beat of their own drum and allowing News to delude themselves and their readers quite happily.

The NRL aren't like the AFL. There seems no willingness to win a public relations battle, as much as we might like them to do so sometimes. Rather they just want to get the best deal possible. I am convinced that there will be outcomes that will surprise everyone, much like the stripping away of F&L rights was last time. Even when it is complete I doubt we'll see the 10 flag press conference like what the AFL had.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,457
I cant believe that this is a serious proposition from News Ltd...

6pm Friday over a 6.30 Sunday game?
$800M for 5 years simulcasting all games and exclusive Super Saturday?

I would love to be on the NRL side of the negotiations if this is the best they can come up with two years out...

Imagine how much they will be squirming this time next year? ( whilst the NRL still has Nine's $925 Mil in their back pocket.... even that alone would be enough to run the game!)
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,587
Normally I would say it is so ludicrous it cant possibly be an option for the NRL to agree to it, then I remind myself this is Rugby league and the games history is littered with terrible management decisions so who knows?

I honestly cant see a ninth game being probable, best hope for that is if the NRL had forged ahead and announced it last year and made them pay for it in the next deal like the AFL has. It didn't get up last tv rights deal taking the pay for it if you want it approach and I see nothing to suggest it will this time. Arguably it was more favourable to Ch9 in terms of FTA Brisbane covg to have a second Brisbane team to cover than the value of an extra game to Fox, especially if they get simulcast on all 8 games.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,457
If News/Fox are looking at a new time slot on Friday night, than Perth 9.30 pm Eastern time makes more sense than 6.00pm Eastern.

Also, with a Second Brisbane team they might get to show a Brisbane team regularly on a Super Saturday ( they will never be a hope otherwise as the Broncos will be committed to Nine and Thurday/Friday - shouldn't that drive subscription in Brisbane?).

They can have a Perth and Brisbane team for the paltry price of $25Mil per year extra ( enough to pay salary cap/and club top ups for 2 extra teams...)
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,456
Nine 925 - 200m Sat night game - 100m simulcasting = 625m/125m pa (+38%)
Fox 200m sat night game + 650m 4 other games + 100m simulcasting = 950m/190m pa (+65%)

AUS Total = 1.575bn/315m pa + NZ 100m/20m pa + Telstra 200m/40m pa = 1.875bn/375m pa (~+56%)

NRL TV deal worth $1.9 billion if Nine sell-out to Fox Sports
ROY MASTERS

Should Channel Nine surrender the right to broadcast Saturday night matches, in exchange for a payment of $40m per year from Fox Sports, a $1.9 billion NRL TV deal from 2018 to 2022 is likely.

Fox Sports Super Saturday coverage is critical to the News Corporation owned network, allowing it to sell the same number of games to subscribers as it does under the existing deal, which still has two years to run.

The $925 million five-year deal Nine negotiated with the NRL in August meant four games per week would be seen on free-to-air TV, a potential tipping point for subscribers to consider a sporting life without Foxtel.

Furthermore, the Nine deal left unsold the other four games in the NRL eight games per week schedule.

The price the NRL will expect for the key 7.30pm Saturday time slot, should it be sold to Fox Sports and therefore no longer be available to every household in Australia, is critical to the final overarching deal.

Nine, keen to reduce costs, will demand $40 million per year, reducing by $200 million, the $925 million deal negotiated with outgoing NRL chief executive Dave Smith.

Fox Sports has offered $130 million a year for the other four games.

The NRL has indicated this is too low and presumably rejects the notion it is selling "bottom four" games.

It now controls all scheduling and won't necessarily devalue pay TV games by always programming the best ones for free-to-air slots.

Nine's costs could be further reduced by $100 million over five years if Fox Sports agree to simulcast Nine's Thursday night, Friday night and Sunday afternoon games.

This would mean Nine paying a total of $625 million, a still significant 39 per cent increase on the $450 million it paid for the same number of games in the current contract.

However, as leading sports media rights advisor Colin Smith points out, the NRL has surrendered competitive tension to Nine, allowing it to sell a game to a rival broadcaster and therefore becoming the effective holder of first and last rights.

This is an ironic twist considering rugby league's last TV deal was a desperate battle by ARL commissioners to successfully extricate themselves from News Corporation's first and last rights, which extended to 2027, a win that contributed to News Ltd boss Kim Williams losing his job.

NRL club warlords, such as the Roosters' Nick Politis and the Bulldogs' Ray Dibb, will be watching with Machievellian manouevering recent revelations in Rupert Murdoch's newspapers of a possible $1.8 billion deal from 2018-22.

Assuming Nine pays $625 million; Fox Sports outlays $200 million for the critical Saturday night match, $100 million for simulcast and $650 million for the remaining four games, the Australian TV total is $1.055 million.

Telstra paid $100 million for digital rights last time and Optus' recent purchase of the EPL rights, will probably force the Australian owned telco to double its offering to $200 million.

Sky New Zealand can be expected to pay between $80 million and $100 million over the five years.

Nine, Fox Sports, Telstra and New Zealand payments add up to $1.875 billion, just over the projected $1.8 billion.

While the club warlords may declare this "get out of jail" money, it won't stop their politicking for a greater role on the make up of the ARL Commission.

The only meaningful comparison they will make is to compare the final NRL TV deal to the $2.55 billion over six years contract awarded the AFL by News Corporation, Channel Seven and Telstra.

This is equivalent to a five year term of $2.13 billion, or a 70 per cent increase on their current $1.250 billion deal which still has one year left.

It is not realistic for the NRL rebels to demand the same money as AFL, considering it has an additional game to sell (nine compared to eight) and its two-hour format over four quarters allows for more commercial breaks.

However, Politis and his cohorts will expect a 70 per cent increase on the NRL's current $1.125 billion, considering the last increase was 80 per cent and the code dominated top five Australian ratings in 2015.

That's a figure of $1.9 billion and there is no need for a rush to achieve it, considering there are two years left to negotiate in a world of rapidly changing technology, while the AFL has locked itself out of it for seven years.

Should Nine sell Saturday night to Fox Sports, it will end the dream of Nine's chief executive, David Gyngell, whose ultimate ambition is a four-quarter game of rugby league on primetime nights, going up against AFL.

Unless, of course, Gyngell returns as an ARL commissioner.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/g-20151112-gkxcaw.html
 
Last edited:

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,457
This would mean Nine paying a total of $625 million, a still significant 39 per cent increase on the $450 million it paid for the same number of games in the current contract.

Wow - 39% increase for the same content they have now...!

What a joke that would be...
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,456
I still think they will get 2bn, I think that's the number the NRL want. Until it's announced no one will know where it lands.
 

Desert Qlder

First Grade
Messages
9,387
Masters hasn't added any new information.

Other than to add another increment to the total dollar figure bringing to $1.9B. A figure that seems to be growing by the day.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,457
I still think they will get 2bn, I think that's the number the NRL want. Until it's announced no one will know where it lands.

I think $2 Bil is achievable also, but if they manage to get that with Nine paying $625 Mil with in effect a superior coverage and the NRL having to compromise their schedule with Thurs night games than Gyngell is a genius and Smirh has been schooled.
 

Last Week

Bench
Messages
3,725
I think $2 Bil is achievable also, but if they manage to get that with Nine paying $625 Mil with in effect a superior coverage and the NRL having to compromise their schedule with Thurs night games than Gyngell is a genius and Smirh has been schooled.

By moving on of the Friday games to Thursday night? Not really, we have got control of the schedule again.

Thursday night match, control of the schedule and 39% more cash.
vs
2 Friday matches (one on delay ay 9:30pm), no control of schedule and current cash.

Still seems like an awesome deal to me. I hate footy being played between Monday and Thursday, but this is a compromise after all. We can't have it all. We're not going to get a $2billion dollar deal with all games on Sunday arvo and on all FTA channels.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Nine 925 - 200m Sat night game - 100m simulcasting = 625m/125m pa (+38%)
Fox 200m sat night game + 650m 4 other games + 100m simulcasting = 950m/190m pa (+65%)

AUS Total = 1.575bn/315m pa + NZ 100m/20m pa + Telstra 200m/40m pa = 1.875bn/375m pa (~+56%)

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/g-20151112-gkxcaw.html

I'm keen to know the source of the $40m/$200m Saturday number and if it comes from 9 directly or if it's just speculation. I'm wondering if Masters is simply repeating Walter here and if so where it came from originally.

The reason being - at the moment the suggestion is the game is worth only 20% of the simulcasting rights but 25% of the F2A broadcast rights -- which remember also includes things like Origin, Finals, Grand Final etc. Not only is the suggestion that the game is the most expensive out of the 4 regular matches but those other things count for nothing.

If it comes directly from 9 then it's going to make things difficult for Foxtel as they won't swallow that logic easily (any delay benefits the NRL).
 
Last edited:

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Wow - 39% increase for the same content they have now...!

What a joke that would be...

Except if you think about it a different way -- the NRL don't lose out as the difference has to be made up by Foxtel instead for Foxtel to get what they want. So yes 9 benefits by paying a lower price but the NRL effectively has a safety net.

This is what Colin Smith has failed to acknowledge in his analysis.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,457
In addition ( and I have said this earlier) why is there a " dollar for dollar" value with how Nine value the Sat night game as opposed to how Fox value it?

Surely total Saturday exclusivity is more value to Fox, so if Nine "give up" x amount, why can't Fox pay the NRL x + 25%?

Also, I agree with the Doc - Nine valuing the Sat game at $40 mil? Really?

Surely Thurs and Fri are worth more, not to mention that this deal includes Origin as well which was supposed to be worth $25-30mil a year on its own?
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,748
Prefer we let Ch 9 have Sat 7:30

Then Fox can do a leadin on Sat just like they do on Sunday
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,587
People always miss that the competition naming rights are bundled into the digital rights at the moment. these alone are worth $10mill a year if AFL value is a marker. Anything Telstra offer for digital rights including naming you should take out $50million which is the naming rights value if comparing what Telstra are paying AFL for digital coverage.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Col may have but News would have edited it out

They could have (if they did he'd know it) but if I had to put my money on it it's because he chose to omit it himself because it didn't favour the story that he wanted to sell - that's the kind of guy he is.

I'm not saying he doesn't know his business - he is shrewd. But the reason he's the "go to man" is because he's made himself that -- essentially so he can tell his clients -- "Look, see how seriously everyone takes me". That's the ouroboros world of spin.
 

Latest posts

Top